how do you counter this argument

[ninotoreS]

ADP is directly reflective of consensus demand and desirability, and this reflects consensus value. Needless to say.

Anyway, across a sample of leagues, a player with a higher ADP is harder to obtain in a start-up / rookie-draft than a player with a lower ADP. This is basic.

Meh ADP is mis-named. It should be FDP not ADP. Its the first person (who is obviously the highest) who drafts him - and that changes from league to league.

This doesn't make any sense. Surely you understand the concept of averages in statistics, and consensus.

That bad drafters (and entire leagues) exist who reach on picks and pass on others that they shouldn't is irrelevant; they don't represent consensus. If nine 12-team leagues take player X in round 1 and one 12-team league takes player X in round 4, that probably only means that one league is comprised of owners of dubious competence.

If you're the one competent owner in a league full of idiots, then obviously you can get away with a lot. And your experiences won't be useful to owners that participate in more competent leagues.

[ArrylT]

ADP is directly reflective of consensus demand and desirability, and this reflects consensus value. C'mon, dude.

It should be FDP not ADP. Its the first person (who is obviously the highest) who drafts him - and that changes from league to league.

This doesn't make any sense at all. Surely you understand the concept of averages in statistics, and consensus.

As I said ADP is not a true average - it is the ADP of the highest person on that player. That does not to me suggest it reflective of demand or not. It is reflective of where you would need to draft that player if you want to be the highest on them.

1000 owners did not say we agree Player X is worth the Y pick. For DLF ADP 6 owners did that. 6 people do not make a consensus imho. Furthermore thats 1QB adp, which is not 2QB/SF ADP. Owners who want to follow the herd and play it safe can do that. I am not that owner. I dont say - oh Elliot is ADP of 6 so I better go take him at 7 in my SF startup because now he is a value.

Heck the 2 QB rankings have Elliot at 5 overall even though not ONE ranking has him higher than 6th. Yet thats consensus?? To me that is like saying 8 different people agree my house is worth somewhere between 600 and 800 K, so ergo its worth 1 million.

I am well aware of VBD and the baselines.

In any case, like I said above, none of that in any way suggests that it is easier in a SF league to actually find a QB1 than a RB1 a year(s) later from the startup.

In the end, if I have a QB1, and an RB1 and I am offered another QB1 and a potential RB1 - then I may very well prefer having 2 QB1s and hope the RB pans out. Thats 3 positions addressed vs. 2. If I have no QB1 and just the RB1, then now I would have 1 QB1 and 1 potential RB1.

Of course if an owner doesnt see Cousins as a QB1 or the possibility of an RB1 being available at 9, then absolutely it is probably a safer bet for them to keep Elliott.

[thebeast]

^ then use MFL data, it’s typically not that different at the top. ADP is a good indicator of startup value. I think you’ve talked yourself into some incorrect logic.

And I agree with the OP, both those offers are too light for Zeke.

[honcho55]

You seem to be treating Superflex like it's 2QB. There is a difference.

I generally treat superflex like 2qb. If not you’re spending a high pick on a r/w/t to score what any starting qb from the 6th round could’ve in that flex spot.

That said I agree with your second paragraph 200%

[ArrylT]

The OPs situation isnt a startup - so I dont really see how startup ADP would apply regardless, other than a partial frame of reference that some owners like to use. It doesnt matter to me if Player X has ADP of 6, if I prefer Player Z to Player X, even if Player Zs ADP is less than Player X (say 15).

[thebeast]

When you are trading away first round startup players startup value applies greatly to the situation. How could it not?

[_yeti]

I would say the key is to be swayed less by the talking component of negotiations and believe in your valuations. You knew where you stood, anyone offering evaluations as they offer a thing is giving a sales pitch. I greatly enjoy trading and trade more than most... but of the deals I try to make, 90% don't get made. Sometimes it isn't about having the perfect counter argument, it just means there isn't a trade to make. Also, people that push these type of "valuations" with trade offers often always do it. Funny how they are always giving up a great thing for a lesser thing

Here is my key to making good deals and making them stick: Make a fair offer for the thing you want, with the amount you are willing to part with. Then it happens or doesn't. It's fun to do the chatter and barter but it seems to rarely be productive in my experience and when it is, those people are the ones who don't give these over the top pitches. At the same time, sometimes there really is just very different viewpoints bc we all tend to hold biases toward our own guys.

[thebeast]

^ sound advice. The response to the sales pitch is ‘sounds like I’m saving you from yourself. I wouldn’t want you to lose value.’

[jordanzs]

You're asking how to "counter the argument".

It's easy. You just say that you're happy with Rivers & Stafford and you'll keep those owners on speed dial in case one of those guys go down midway through your championship push.

The owners are coming after you. You don't need to counter anything. You just need to squash them from twisting your arm into a "mercy-trade". Out of curiosity, have the coerced you into making any trades in the past?

They are playing to win. They want their teams to win, not yours. If I was in 'your' league, I would see that you have 2 established QBs already and I would assume that I can't pry Zeke away from you by offering up another one.

If they come back & try to argue value with me, I will make them feel silly & politely expose that they're only looking out for their best interests & not mine. The harder they push, the more they would be digging their hole. I have fun toying with those kind of owners. But don't burn a trade bridge as you might need to deal with them in the future.

[ArrylT]

When you are trading away first round startup players startup value applies greatly to the situation. How could it not?

When you believe the player(s) you are getting back have more value to your team than what is suggested by an ADP that may or may not reflect your leagues market or team need.

It certainly does not matter to me what Zekes adp is if none of the other owners want to trade me a player in that same adp range, or if I dont want any of those players. I see no reason to handcuff ones self to what other peoples "consensus" ADP is, thats basically a version of a trade veto.

[jaykay22]

OP: Your fellow league mates are snake oil salesmen. Almost always when someone is desperately trying to convince you about how much they're trying to help you, they're trying to screw you. I would personally reject the offer and simply write "I believe our evaluations are much too far" and that's it. Chances are they will get upset that you're not accepting their offers, but you're not obligated to accept their offers as you are free to run your team however you wish. The owners who are serious about their interest in a player don't waste your time with paragraphs, they make reasonable, appealing offers that intersect the needs of both rosters.